Re: Economic Literacy

Letters to the Editor

Editor: The December issue of The
Region was dedicated to the topic of economic literacy and
drew many responses from readers of the magazine and users of our Web
site, where an interactive version of the magazine's survey appeared.
The messages are appreciated and some of the ideas will help us shape
our upcoming national symposium on economic literacy (the June 1999 Region
will report on the symposium). A number of the respondents debated the
merits (or demerits) of our survey questions and answers, while others
wrote more generally about the topic of economic literacy and education.
We include a small sampling of the latter group here.

Dear Editor, I would like to thank you for posting the interactive
quiz on your Web site. I believe that this quiz is a good public service
to all Americans. By showing how "economically illiterate" most
of the population is, perhaps it will push more Americans and business
leaders to become more economically minded.

I heard about your quiz from my Principles of Macroeconomics
professor here at Auburn University. I must say that I was, at
first, scoffing at the simplicity of some of the questions; however,
seeing the statistics you gave on scoring (404 respondents scored
less than 45 percent?) was a real wake-up call for me. This survey
proves that if the federal government wants our country to be
more economically sound, they need to push for more economic education
in public high schools.

I remember only having to take one semester of economics in high
school, after that I thought I had a good idea of how markets
in Westernized countries worked. After taking my first economics
course at Auburn last quarter, I realized that there was so much
more to economics than spending and saving. It is almost scary
to think that we may have a whole generation not knowing the effects
that some popular legislation can have on an economy (i.e., raising
the minimum wage and shifts in the interest rates due to political
pressures).

While I am not an economics major, I do believe that I now, thanks
to more economic education, have a better understanding of how
American markets work, and how to correct and prevent problems.
Again, thank you for bringing this type of illiteracy to the attention
of the American public.

Dear Editor, V.12, Number 4, of The Region was a useful
issue in terms of exploring the concept of economic literacy.
A couple of brief comments. ...

Professor Heyne's piece on "Moral
Misunderstanding and the Justification of Markets"
was an attempt to explain the perceived irreconciliation between
the world of ethics and of economics. Rather than justifying
the inherent "rightness" of economic practices vs.
the ingrained sense of morality that we are brought up with,
Prof. Heyne rightly suggests that to make an economics education
work, we need to listen to those who hold convictions seemingly
at odds with those of their teachers. This can also be applied
to those who come to the classroom with notions of creationism
while the biology teachers among us go blue in the face trying
to teach the theory of natural selection.

While agreeing with Prof. Heyne's overall tone
I wonder how he sees the view of Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen,
who has talked about "the ethical dimension" of economics
(featured in [a recent] Scientific American and
many of his publications). Prof. Sen's views are closer to mine
in explaining economic processes as they apply to the poorest
in developing nations, where much of my own work takes place.

Kudos to The Region for making the
topic of economic literacy a "discussable" one, without
the jargon that frequently renders the subject inaccessible
to lay people; moreover, to lay out the argument in such terms
that those of us who inherently feel that economics is a basic
component of education are able to take these arguments and
make an effective case for our convictions.

Omar A. Khan
Associate Faculty
Johns Hopkins University

Dear Editor,
As a college teacher of economics for 10 years, I would guess
that the majority of principles of economics students come away
from the course with a strong dislike of the subject, and disbelief
of what is taught. Part of the problem is the self-selection of
economics professors, and their own inadequate social science
training. They are committed to a rational choice model of human
behavior. This was my orientation too, until I started teaching
myself some psychology. This leads to a much deeper understanding
of what motivates human action. If we could weave some psychology
and evolutionary biology into introductory economics, it would
make it far more interesting for students, and more believable.
Those professors in your article who think "more calculus"
is the answer just don't get it!